Announcement by the Acting Chair

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. LUCAS. Mr. Chairman, I think it is worth once again considering how we got to this point. Considering that under regular committee order, we should have taken this bill up 6 months ago. Three months ago, many of us went from the point of pleading to demanding, pressing harder and harder to try to bring this to the focus. Ultimately, that was not the option, and we were obligated to use a rather old but important rule in order to bring this legislation to the floor.

As some of my colleagues have noted, a supermajority of the House voted for it--313 Members. A majority of the Republican Conference, a majority of the majority voted for it. Yet now we are at a point where we are rebattling all of these amendments.

If you can't win by playing by the rules, then how do you win in this place? If we defeat all of these amendments, will things mysteriously happen in the next process and we will have to fight that off? That is why I tell my colleagues: Play by the rules. Remember what we accomplished last week? Understand the real purpose of these amendments. If it was to perfect a bill, then the authors would have been working with us 6 months ago or 3 months ago or a few weeks ago, but that wasn't the option provided. So now, a second time, we have to fight our way all the way through these issues.

Please demonstrate that you care about economic competitiveness in this country. Please demonstrate that you care about workers in this country. Reject all of these amendments. Let's move the process over. Let's finish this for real.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. LUCAS. I thank the ranking member.

Mr. Chairman, I will just simply ask my colleagues: Why did we get to this point? Why should we vote against this amendment? Why should we vote against all 10 amendments?

It is because, 100 years ago, our friends--our predecessors--set up a system so that, if a Speaker or a chairman thwarted the will of the body, there would be a way for the membership to bring it forward and pass it; but the system had to be created so streamlined that that same force or forces working to prevent the body from working its will could not overcome it.

Last week, we demonstrated that rule worked. Unfortunately, today, we are demonstrating they didn't quite think everything through, because we are revoting or we are voting on 10 issues on a subject matter that was solved last week.

My colleagues, if you enjoy being here this evening, if you enjoy listening to this debate all over again, I am sorry. The proponents didn't do this. We thought we had won by playing fair and square last week. Furthermore, we would have loved this debate 6 months ago.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. LUCAS. Mr. Chair, once again, let's turn this amendment down. Let's turn back all of these amendments.

If anything, this amendment appears to try to fix the problem that one company has in one sector in one region of the world. Some people might define that as crony capitalism. Others might even call it an earmark.

Let's turn it back. Let's turn all these back. Let's get on with our business. I'm sorry we have to go through this this evening.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. LUCAS. Mr. Chairman, I think it is relevant that we think for a moment about the Bank.

Some of my friends here who press these amendments--which, I would remind you, you should vote against all of them--say that they are not trying to kill the Bank. They are trying to do something.

Well, didn't the Bank expire in July? Isn't it no longer able to do new business? Isn't that the definition of dead? By their lack of action, which is inaction, they killed it. Now they say, with their actions, they will resurrect it? Not likely, my friends.

Turn all these amendments down. Let's get on with the core business here. Let's fight the fight we fought last week again, and one more time let's give American business an opportunity to compete with the rest of the world.

Who knows--we might have to do this three or four more times, but let's keep doing the right thing for American workers. Let's keep doing the right thing for American business. That is all I am asking: just do the right thing and abide by the decision of the House and the majority of the majority.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. LUCAS. I thank the ranking member, and I thank the chairman.

Mr. Chair, I would simply note that the provision requires U.S. business to factor in new costs of a guarantee for repayment to the Ex-Im Bank, in addition to the fees and interests already required. Those additional costs would make U.S. business less competitive.

Now, that said, once again, I urge my colleagues to turn back this amendment, turn back all 10 amendments.

Remember, the Bank expired in July. When my friends say they don't want to kill it, they already have. Now they are just trying to keep it from being brought back to be able to function as a part of our economy.

Look through the amendment process we are going through here. Look at the whole process we are involved in. Understand what is really occurring.

Nothing ever happens by accident in politics--right?--or the legislative process. Understand the fight we are engaged in.

Turn back this amendment. Turn back all these amendments. Let's get on with it. If we could have made things better 6 months ago, we would have, but we weren't allowed to.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. LUCAS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the ranking member.

Mr. Chairman, first, before we talk about the substance of the amendment, let's look at the lay of the land. I am a farmer by trade. That is always something you do, you look at the lay of the land.

The six principal authors of the 10 amendments offered today, all members of Financial Services, none of them were proponents 6 months ago when we were attempting, pleading to bring this bill up for consideration.

None of these six, as I remember, demanded that we bring the bill up 3 months ago when frustration caught up with us. None of these six signed the discharge petition to use a rule of the House to allow this body to have its say. I don't believe any of these six authors actually voted to discharge the petition or voted for the final product last week when 313 Members of this body and a majority of the majority voted for it. So understand the lay of the land. Understand the nature.

Now, I have the greatest respect for the chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee. I sat next to him for 20 years on Financial Services. He is extremely sincere. My friends, the issues he brings up in this amendment are relevant, but his chairmanship of the committee he presides over has primary jurisdiction on this.

This particular amendment would address a small part of one part of the things the Federal Government does. Maybe we need a bill to address all of these kinds of situations. Maybe we need--as we should have had on Export-Import in Financial Services--a thoughtful and considerate process to craft a good, solid piece of legislation. I know he is capable of it. I know he can do it. I want him to do it.

But let's do it in that concept of regular order in regular process. Let's not take this situation where we have had to do extraordinary things to give the House a chance to make the decision. Let's not take this situation now and in the spirit of the folks who set up the discharge process 100-plus years ago say: Well, the House decided, but really the House's opinion doesn't matter. Now we are going to redo it. We are going to go a different way.

Now, Mr. Chairman, I have faith this evening that, after my colleagues have listened to this debate on 10 amendments, when they come to the floor and vote on all 10 amendments, they will turn all 10 down. I am sorry, my colleagues, that you have to do this, because we shouldn't be here doing this tonight. This was decided last week.

But I hope if we will send a clear message and turn back all 10 amendments, that this will be over with. Let's not do this again next week. That is contrary to the spirit of the House.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. LUCAS. I thank the ranking member.

Mr. Chairman, I will note to my colleagues that I think the world of the gentleman from Georgia. He is a wonderful fellow as he is trying to help his people, but politics is like life--a lack of action is an action. When there was no action to help move an Export-Import reauthorization bill this spring or this summer, then the opportunity to do all of these great things went away. We all knew it was going to expire in July, and the people in critical positions chose to let that happen. Discharge was just an opportunity to resurrect what has already died.

Now, I would say this:

Let's finish the process. Let's put it back on the books for 4 years. Let's start the hearing process. If there are reforms and changes that need to be made, then let's file a new bill, and let's go with it; but let's not stop the opportunities economically that are created by this in the intervening period of time.

Mr. Chairman, I would say respectfully to my friend from Georgia, who has out-Southerned me, you are wrong on this one, sir.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source